ChanServ changed the topic of #picolisp to: PicoLisp language | Channel Log: https://irclog.whitequark.org/picolisp/ | Check also http://www.picolisp.com for more information
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
orivej has joined #picolisp
aw- has joined #picolisp
<Regenaxer> Good morning aw-! Thank for the explanations in the ML! It s plausible
<aw-> hi Regenaxer
<aw-> np
<Regenaxer> :)
<aw-> sorry i wrote linked, just loaded right?
<Regenaxer> yeah
<Regenaxer> so it is just lying around
<Regenaxer> the lib
<aw-> oh you're right!
<aw-> i just looked at the Makefile
<aw-> haha
<aw-> you're not using -lreadline or -llibreadline
<Regenaxer> I now understand the "distribution" happens in e.g. Debian
<Regenaxer> and GPL is about distributing
<aw-> yes exactly
<aw-> so it compiles fine without libreadline?
<Regenaxer> yes
<aw-> does the picolisp binary work without it?
<Regenaxer> No, because the OS wants to link it at startup
<aw-> oh
<Regenaxer> same as others, e.g glibc
<Regenaxer> though glibc is probably LGPL
<aw-> but if you dont link to libreadline, why it appears in 'ldd' output?
<aw-> i guess that's what confused me
<Regenaxer> It *is* linked, but dynamically
<aw-> right right
<Regenaxer> it refers to functions in libreadline
<aw-> dynamically* is the keyword
<Regenaxer> I think so
<aw-> yeah there's no licensing issue with that
<aw-> even if it were statically linked at compile time, it's still not a licensing issue
<Regenaxer> picolisp has only symbol names like init_readline
<Regenaxer> I think so
<Regenaxer> linking happens at compile time on the target hardware
<Regenaxer> in case of pil
<aw-> only issue if you distribute the source or binary with libreadline linked in (statically)
<Regenaxer> If we distributed statically linked binaries it would be different
<aw-> you can even distribute the binary with libreadline dynamically linked
<Regenaxer> I'd expect so, yes
<Regenaxer> as I understand it now
<Regenaxer> confusing issue
<aw-> confusing because many people mis-interpret the license
<Regenaxer> I'm very happy not to have rewrite everything now :)
<Regenaxer> T
<aw-> good
<aw-> it would be a disaster if all MIT software suddenly had to become GPL because they link dynamically to GPL libs
<aw-> nightmare
<Regenaxer> indeed
<aw-> it doesn't even make sense
<aw-> anyways the key word is "distributing"
<Regenaxer> most such libs are LGPL though
<Regenaxer> they can even be distributed
<Regenaxer> anyway not an issue with pil
<Regenaxer> and *if* someone wants to package pil with some libs, she is free to do so and put it under GPL
<aw-> yeah LGPL would have been better for libreadline, but they dont want it used in commercial/non-gpl applications
ym has joined #picolisp
<aw-> this licensing world is a mess though
<aw-> honestly
<Regenaxer> exactly
<aw-> it was fine until companies start being dishonest with their usage/distribution
<aw-> and it got worse when companies like Amazon found loopholes in licenses like AGPL
<aw-> instead of playing fair with the community, they skinned it and used the license text to protect themselves.
<Regenaxer> yes
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
orivej has joined #picolisp
<aw-> ugh
<Regenaxer> yep
<aw-> so GPL doesn't even allow dynamic linking?
<Regenaxer> This seems to be not clear
<Regenaxer> 3 points of view exist haha
<aw-> so the goal of GPL is to prevent people from making closed programs
<aw-> picolisp is 100% open source, under MIT as well
<Regenaxer> yes, all about freedom
<aw-> what the hell is wrong with dynamic linking to GPL in that case? you're still distributing pil under open source
<Regenaxer> T
<aw-> this is my argument since the beginning
<aw-> because MIT is not commercial and it's not closed and it's not incompatible to the GPLv3
<aw-> so if your MIT-licensed code links to GPLv3 code, who cares? it doesn't need to "become GPLv3" as well
<aw-> that argument makes no sense when you look at the ideals and goals of GPL
<Regenaxer> I gave up trying to understand it
<Regenaxer> if even the experts find no consense
<aw-> yes
<aw-> just please don't make pil21 GPL
<aw-> that would be the worst decision
<Regenaxer> no worry!
<aw-> and you don't distribute binaries or even the source of libreadline, so this entire discussion is pointless. If picolisp was a commercial closed source software then the discussion is important.. but it's not, so who cares?
<aw-> this needs to stop
<Regenaxer> T
_whitelogger has joined #picolisp
<aw-> i guess some people _really_ don't want you to use libreadline
<aw-> because it creates licensing mess
<aw-> even though it's not really an issue, some think it *could* be an issue and prefer to avoid it
<aw-> it's the chilling effect of the GPL
<aw-> where is beneroth when we need him
<Regenaxer> yeah, but I decided not to care. It is enough! :)
<aw-> good
<Regenaxer> :)
<Regenaxer> Those "some people" may just re-declare picolisp as GPL for their own purpose, right?
<Regenaxer> Anyway, finally, I'll settle on this opinion: https://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6366
<aw-> yes they can
<aw-> Regenaxer: that post mirrors my initial email
<aw-> "will not be broadened to include software created by linking to library programs that were designed and intended to be used as library programs."
<Regenaxer> yep
<aw-> libreadline is meant to be used as a library! why the hell would an MIT-licensed software be required to "become GPL" just because it's using libreadline as a library?
<aw-> it makes no sense!
<aw-> legal semantics aside, it's plain stupid
<Regenaxer> That's our world
<aw-> yes it's frustrating
<aw-> stupid discussion
<Regenaxer> Let's forget the issue
<aw-> yes
orivej has joined #picolisp
Blukunfando has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
Blukunfando has joined #picolisp
<beneroth> hey
<beneroth> sorry guys
<beneroth> Regenaxer, aw- static linked vs. dynamically linked? I think that is a border in the current understanding.
<Regenaxer> Hi beneroth!
<beneroth> I haven't looked into libreadline, but from what I read here I suspect it practically makes the picolisp VM into GPL
<beneroth> Hi Regenaxer !
<Regenaxer> We discussed this a lot now
<Regenaxer> Did you read the ML thread?
<beneroth> so people who redistribute picolisp commercially may want to remove libreadline from it
<beneroth> no :)
<beneroth> will do
<Regenaxer> saying that the situation is not clear
<Regenaxer> The lawyers disagree
<beneroth> I find it is good that picolisp is MIT and not GPL.
<beneroth> yeah
<Regenaxer> right, me too
<Regenaxer> Also for simplicity!
<beneroth> and whatever is clear now might be turned on his head once the Google vs. Oracle lawsuit in USA gets a decision
<Regenaxer> GPL soo complicated that such discussions arise
<Regenaxer> Sorry, afp
<beneroth> my view is: a language is infrastructure, we favor it's widespread use, as infrastructure it is good to be used commercially too...
<beneroth> yeah
<beneroth> practically it doesn't matter much for us, I think
<beneroth> afk
ym has quit [Quit: Leaving]
michelp has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
michelp has joined #picolisp
orivej has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
Regenaxer has quit [*.net *.split]
inara has quit [*.net *.split]
Regenaxer has joined #picolisp
inara has joined #picolisp
orivej has joined #picolisp